Comparison of in Situ Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity of Restored and Native Prairies.

Prairies are important living systems in ecosystems and their importance has been recognized by scientists for many decades. These complex living systems play a vital role both biologically and ecologically in the environment and support a large amount of wildlife. Due to extensive farming activities, nearly all of the North American prairie grasslands have been destroyed and the remaining are under severe threat. The objective of this study was to compare and contrast in situ saturated hydraulic conductivity throughout soil profiles (1.3 m soil depth by horizon) for native prairie, restored prairie, and row crop management sites.  This research study was conducted in Missouri at two prairie sites (a native prairie and a restored prairie) as well as at a continuous row crop management site.    The sites included Tucker Prairie (native prairie), Prairie Fork (restored prairie), and Centralia Research site [corn (Zea mays)/soybean (Glycine max) rotation]. Soils selected for restored prairie and row crop fields are classified as Mexico silt loam 1 to 4% slope. The native prairie site has Putnam 1 to 4% slope soil. All these soils have a characteristic claypan (B horizon).  Five readings with the Amoozemeter were collected for each horizon. Saturated soil hydraulic conductivity (K_sat) was higher under native prairie compared to restored prairie. Moreover, the highest K_sat was observed in the E horizon of native prairie. However, restored prairies showed higher K_sat as compared to row crop fields.  Also, K_sat was comparatively higher in the B horizon of row crop management compared to values in E and B_t horizons of native and restored prairies, respectively. Results of the study imply that prairie restoration helps improve K_sat which will help reduce runoff.

K_sat = Saturated hydraulic conductivity

Keywords: native prairies, restored prairies, Amoozemeter, claypan, saturated hydraulic conductivity.